ATLANTA – As Georgia looks ahead to the 2026 elections, a court fight is still brewing over the election maps scheduled to be used.
The federal court of appeals in Atlanta heard three cases Thursday stemming from those early maps, which were drawn by state lawmakers in response to the decennial population count in 2020.
The outcome could influence the next elections, and it could inform future courts about how to interpret the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibits race-based discrimination.
At issue is the way lawmakers responded to a district court’s order to redraw maps that were found to have discriminated against Black voters by diminishing their influence.
The court ordered the state to redo the maps so that more districts were majority Black.
The state redrew them, and the court approved the results, leading to the appeals by the American Civil Liberties Union and by numerous voters.
Lawyers in those three cases made many of the same points Thursday morning.
The plaintiffs argued that the state violated the federal election law by creating new Black majority districts by using Black voters from other Black majority districts or districts where white voters tended to vote with Black voters.
The state’s attorney countered that the law doesn’t prohibit that.
“Are there the right number of districts? Yes,” said Stephen J. Petrany, solicitor general for Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr. “Are they basically in the right area? Yes. That is the end of this case.”
Judge Adalberto Jordan, one of the three judges hearing the cases before the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, pressed Petrany, saying the plaintiffs were asserting that the state’s remedy “completely excludes” the aggrieved Black voters who used to be part of a racial majority voting area but were now in the minority, by creating new Black-majority districts with other Black voters.
Petrany said not all Black voters were so moved and that it wouldn’t be illegal if they had been.
Abha Khanna, arguing for the plaintiffs in two of the cases — Coakley Pendergrass et. al. v. Georgia Secretary of State and Annie Grant et. al. v. Georgia Secretary of State — said the state was moving voters around on a board without changing the game.
“In the Grant case, there are 185,000-plus Black voters who have suffered a vote dilution injury,” she said, meaning they were shifted into a white-majority area that was unlikely to elect Black candidates while other Black voters in a Black-majority voting district were moved to a new district with a Black majority.
“It was a shell game,” she said.
Ari Savitzky of the ACLU argued for the plaintiffs in the third case, Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity, Inc. v. Georgia Secretary of State. He said the district court failed to do due diligence on the remediation maps.
He alleged that the state simply re-labeled districts and that the district judge accepted them on their face.
“The district court fundamentally didn’t look at these numbers,” Savitzky said.
It is unclear when the appeals court will issue decisions. Judge Jordan said there would be no ruling until another case also pending in the appellate court is decided. That is the case that led to the remediation maps.
Although the state lost that first round and then redrew the maps, it also appealed that court loss.
It’s unclear whether any of these decisions will be made in time to affect next year’s elections.